2012 Ford Fusion Se on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2020 Ford Explorer ST vs 2019 Dodge Durango SRT: How they compare on paper

For a few years now, the Dodge Durango SRT has been the sole three-row performance crossover from a non-luxury brand. That all changes now that the 2020 Ford Explorer ST is coming to market. Now we have two family crossovers with rear-drive-based platforms vying for buyers that demand practicality and power. As such, there's no better time to dig into their specs to see how they compare. We'll check out each crossover's horsepower, torque, space, capability and prices. The full specs are listed below, followed by some analysis afterward. We also compared the regular 2020 Explorer models to other crossovers in this segment, if if that's not enough, you can check out our car comparison tool. Performance The Explorer and Durango go about making power in very different ways. The Explorer goes the force-fed route with two turbos feeding a 3.0-liter V6, while the Durango's enormous 6.4-liter V8 produces power with air flow au natural. Of the two, the Durango has the greater output of 475 ponies and 470 pound-feet of torque, feeding the flames of everyone that lives by the phrase "There's no replacement for displacement." The Explorer is no slouch at 400 horsepower and 415 pound-feet of torque, though. Performance isn't purely based on power, though. Other factors play a role, such as weight, and in that regard, the Explorer is way ahead. At 4,701 pounds, it weighs a massive 809 pounds less than the portly Durango. This also means that both crossovers are very close in weight-to-power ratio, with the Explorer only slightly worse at 11.75 pounds per horsepower and the Durango at 11.6. Less weight will also play a roll in handling, and the Explorer is likely to feel sprightlier without so much mass to shift back and forth. Semi-related to handling are tire sizes. The Durango features 295-mm wide tires on 20-inch wheels. The Explorer has 255-mm wide tires on 20-inch wheels, but 21-inch wheels with 275-mm tires are available. So the Durango is working with more contact patch, but as we mentioned, it's carrying a lot more weight. 2020 Ford Explorer ST View 20 Photos Interior Space and Practicality Although the Durango SRT is the largest on the outside in every dimension, it loses out to Explorer repeatedly inside. The Ford has more headroom, leg room and shoulder room in nearly every row except the third-row where headroom comes up a bit short.

MotorWeek relives '80s coupes with Dodge Daytona, Ford Escort EXP

Get ready for a wave of nostalgia and the rapid realization of the huge progress in performance cars over the last 30 years. For its latest Retro Review, MotorWeek takes a look back at two, front-wheel drive coupes from the '80s that seem to have entirely vanished from the roads today. Both the 1986 Dodge Daytona CS and the 1986.5 Ford Escort EXP were considered affordable, sporty options in their day, but the passage of time hasn't been kind to either of their specs. The Daytona certainly looks the part of a performance machine with a body that's reminiscent of other '80s coupes, like the third-gen Chevrolet Camaro. However with 146 horsepower and 170 pound-feet of torque from a 2.2-liter turbocharged four-cylinder, acceleration wasn't exactly a strong suit. MotorWeek complained about copious torque steer, as well. The optional CS suspension upgrade package on this Daytona was apparently a nod to Carroll Shelby who was working with Dodge at the time. If anything, the Escort EXP withstands the test of time even worse. As a two-seat coupe, you might have expected Ford's engineers to really turn up the performance to fit the sporty image that the exterior conveyed. That didn't really happen, and depending on which model buyers ordered, they got either 86 horsepower with a 1.9-liter engine or the "high-output" version of that mill with 108 hp.

Suppliers love Toyota and Honda: Why that matters to you

You might think that a survey of automotive suppliers and their relationship with OEMs is the automotive equivalent of nerd prom. In some ways that's what the North American Automotive OEM-Supplier Working Relations Index (WRI) is. The study, the 17th annual conducted by Planning Perspectives Inc., is based on input from 652 salespeople from 108 Tier One suppliers, or, PPI points out, 40 of the top 50 automotive suppliers in North America. Suppliers to General Motors, Ford, FCA, Toyota, Honda, and Nissan. But the results have consequences in terms of tens of millions of dollars for OEMs - and in the quality, technology, and cost of the next vehicle you buy. There are a couple of ways to look at the results of the WRI. One is, "So what else is new?" And the other is, "Damn! How did that happen?" The study looks at five relationship areas — OEM Supplier Relationship; OEM Communication; OEM Help; OEM Hindrance; Supplier Profit Opportunity — within six purchasing areas — Body-in-White; Chassis; Electrical/Electronics; Exterior; Interior; Powertrain. In the overall rankings, Toyota is on top for the 15 th time in 17 years, with a score of 328. Honda, the only company to best Toyota (in 2009 and 2010), comes in second, at 319. Those two companies, explains John Henke, president of PPI, have collaborative working arrangements with colleagues and suppliers alike built into the very fabric of their cultures. This, however, is not a situation where one can readily conclude it is about "Japanese companies," because the third company with headquarters on the island of Honshu, Nissan, came in dead last. This is the "How did that happen?" portion. The Nissan score of 203 puts it 125 points behind Toyota. There hasn't been a number that low since the then-Chrysler Corp. scored 187 in 2010, when the company was clawing its way out of the recession. Clearly, the suppliers don't feel particularly engaged by the buyers at Nissan. Henke explains that whether a company does well or not on the WRI is rather simple. All people do things based on what they're measured on. "If you're measured on taking 10% out of your annual buy, you immediately know how to do it. But if you're also measured on improving relations, suddenly there is a new dynamic as to what you can do to achieve both.